Jim of Hills Bros I have a question

just another one to say, stay away from the volvo d12 465hp. only got 5.5 mpg tops over the 450,000 miles i had mine. after $10,000 worth of repairs to the motor alone in first 3 months of this year i gave it back and am driving company again...thanks volvo

 

I had the D12 in my company truck. Got it new, put 500,000 on it, and only replaced the turbo and other odds and ends. Nothing major. It consistently got 6.5 mpg with 11R22.5's, 3.90 rears, and .74 over-drive.

 

Just to be clear, I don't technically work for Hill Bros and their interests are not necessarily my own.

I have the smallest Volvo engine, the D12 and to be honest I'm not sure what the final ratio is on the rears.

The reason I chose to go with this engine is that we primarily operate in the midwest -- relatively flat land. The D12 isn't a good hill climber so if you did a lot of work in the Rockies or someplace similar you would probably be better off choosing something else.

I get about 7.7 MPG mostly by driving on cruise control at 60 MPH. When I'm in hilly terrain with a heavy load I bump it up a couple MPH to delay my first downshift. If I see a hill I'm coming up to is steep and long, I will try to get a run at it. My truck isn't governed.

The tach shows about 1280 RPM for me while I'm cruising down the road. Judging by the way the engine sounds, going much above that substantially increases the work it is doing and, I believe, gulps down much more fuel. I suspect if you were to look at the engine MPG printout of the driver on this thread who was getting 5.5 MPG it would show a lot of time in the 68-75 MPH zone.

The last mechanic that serviced my truck couldn't believe the printout that the machine kicked out. It shows average MPG above 62 MPH for my truck at over 14! Since this normally happens only when I'm going downhill and the engine loafing along, I wasn't surprised.

As far as the Cummins goes, I drove one in a T600 at CFI before and mostly liked it. The CAT pulled hills better, but the Cummins did better on the flatland and seemed to get better MPG. I know one Hill Bros driver with the Cummins and an auto shift that is very heavy on the front end, so much so they had to put on steers with a higher weight limit.

One thing every other engine manufacturer does better than Volvo is the engine brake. I call mine a Jake Hesitator, since it doesn't help that much on steep grades with heavy loads. With my Cummins I went down the Grapevine in California with a full load and didn't even touch the brakes. I read the newer Volvo engines have a better system.

The cat is doing well. She managed to snag some fleas last time through the house which I just noticed on her the other day. She has scratched up the interior pretty good in some spots so I'm not sure how good the resale is going to be on the truck, lol.

Good Luck,

Jim

 

You need to test your shop printouts against hand calculated mpg's every time you fill up and I suspect you'll be highly disappointed with the results you get.

 

I compare fuel cost on a CPM basis. That is the only real way to get accurate information.

For my first year, my adjusted fuel cost was 11.73 CPM. This is the pump price of fuel I purchased (with company discount) minus the FSC I received, divided by the miles I ran. I have a spreadsheet that I posted with full details.

Jim

 

I have the 13 speed. The next time I buy a truck it will be with the i-shift automatic.

Jim